Avetis Muradyan I. Introduction On April 2nd 1945, Sergeant Meliton Kantaria and Sergeant Mikhail A.

Yegorov indicated the completion of Battle of Berlin, consequently that of WWII, by flying the red banner over the Reichstag building. The scene, immortalized by the photographer Yevgeniy Khaldei, would later symbolize the end of an era and the beginning of a new one, a new era characterized by the confrontation of those who had fought Eastward of the beaches of Normandy and those of had fought Westward from the rubbles of the gates of Moscow (Khaldei; Chris). The circumstances of this unpredictable future would shape the life of every single human being around the world and mold geopolitics into a substantially different and more volatile form than any preceding period in human history. The two Colossuses, the US and the USSR, would face each other in a game of chess with the fate of the world on the line. The pieces on the chess board at the beginning of the Cold War would eventually shape the US foreign policy; a policy whose basis would be provided by the economic and political system of the United States and its new role as patriarch of the Western nations. The Foreign Policy of the US during the Cold War was aimed at subduing the Warsaw Pact states and various independent movements challenging the military, political and economic preeminence of the United States and its Western Allies. II. Antagonism between East and West before and during World War II. A. Before WWII Although the Cold War stretched from about 1945 to 1991, the basic mechanisms of the Cold Conflict would begin to come in place prior to World War II. The confrontation of the East and the West, Left and Right would mark the Politics of the European inter-war period. This same confrontation was manifested in the United States as the First Red Scare. The polemics of the Cold War were set in place over the battered body of a war-torn Europe. The forces of Conservatism, headed by industrial Nazi Germany, and the organized Radicalism and leftist Republicanism, supported by the technically Inferior Soviet Union, would clash in a political race to win over allies on continental Europe. This Cold War-style showdown would erupt into military conflict in a proxy war in Spain and military mobilizations from both confronting powers in Eastern Europe. While the United States had taken an isolationist position during the inter-war period, Bourgeois Liberalism, incarnated by the apathetic French Third Republic and the British Monarchy, would endorse a policy of Appeasement towards the Fascist/Conservative coalition and of aggressive indifference towards anyone or anything associated with the Left. 1. Spanish Civil War The Spanish Civil War can be considered the first proxy war of the Cold War, as the forces of the Axis sent material support to the Conservative Nationalists, the Soviet Union used its relation with the Comintern to organize the famous International Brigades and was the main supplier of war materials to the Republican government (Hugh). The Bourgeois Liberal camp endorsed nonIntervention to the Fascist-backed coup and refused to sell weapons to the Spanish Republic (Beevor, The Spanish Civil War)

Avetis Muradyan a. Western Reaction Britain and France vowed on non-intervention and imposed an arms embargo on the Iberian peninsula which allowed Germany and Italy to militarily support Franco and only hampered the supplies sent by the Soviets (Orwell, Homage to Catalonia). The closing of the Franco-Spanish Border would become a major factor in the fall of Republican Spain. The Western shunning of the Loyalist cause was influenced largely by Soviet support for the Republican government and the terrifying specter of war. The proxy-war nature of the Spanish conflict , was reflected in the writings of libertarian socialist George Orwell, fighting as a foreign volunteer for the POUM(marxist organization) who sharply criticized Soviet influence in Republican Spain and the International Brigades (Orwell, Why I Write). After the conclusion of the war, many of the returning volunteers of the International Brigades were prosecuted and denied their citizenships to their subsequent countries of origin. The western prosecution of the men and women who had fought against Fascism would only cease during the 60's when their sacrifices would be recognized. b. U.S reaction At the outbreak of the in 1931, the US was headed by staunch conservative, Herbert Hoover , vowing on staunch isolationism. American business on the other hand actively supported the Nationalist government: The Texas Oil Company diverted a shipment from the Republic to Franco and supplied Franco on credit until the end of the war. While the Neutrality Act of 1935 was in full effect, Ford, Studebaker and General Motors sold 12,000 Trucks to Franco(Beevor, The Spanish Civil War). Volunteers from the US in the international brigades were classified as premature anti-fascists and were required to appear before congressional committees during the Red Scare (Abraham Lincoln Brigade Archives). 2. Eastern Expansion of Third Reich Great Britain and France had taken a stance of appeasement and non-confrontation towards the Hitlerites. The Premiership of Chamberlain had vowed to halt a reversal of the hard-won peace in Europe. In this spirit of appeasement, the west stood and watched as the forces of the Axis crossed into Czechoslovakia, as denoted in the Munich Agreement (Churchill). The policy of appeasement and the results of the Munich Agreement greatly affected the Soviets, who had a treaty of mutual assistance with Czechoslovakia. The diplomatic initiatives were interpreted as active cooperation with Nazi Germany by the Soviet Union and would influence the USSR into signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-Aggression Agreement for security reasons, although this is debated by some historians and authors who qualified the Non-Aggression as an alliance of totalitarianism (Carr). Declassified documents in past few years showed that Britain and the US understood the security initiative of the USSR at that time and the importance of the buffer zone in anticipation of the violation of the Treaty on behalf of Nazi Germany (Parfitt). This view was later changed during the Cold War. The AntiSovietism apparent in the attitudes of Western leaders and the forces of the Reactionary Right was another expression of the antagonisms between East and West before the Cold War which would influence the structure of the confrontation over the Iron Curtain.

Avetis Muradyan B. During WWII 1. Nuclear Weapons The development of Nuclear Weaponry during WWII was to fundamentally affect our understanding of Geopolitics and Security during the Cold War and the Post-Cold War era. Much Controversy surrounds the use of nuclear weaponry at Nagasaki and Hiroshima. One of the contributing factors in the decision-making process was the possibility of Soviet intervention in mainland Japan as such was the agreement at Potsdam. The Soviet entry into the Pacific theater was set for August 15th, this comes into conjunction with the bombing dates of 6th and 9th of August. A report by the Joint Intelligence Staff stated that if the USSR enter the conflict, it would immediately force the Japanese into surrender (Alperovitz). From this point, the seeds of the Cold War were sown in a Nuclear demonstration of force and the threat of mass destruction would overshadow the rest of the 20th century. As the Cold War was fermenting, prospects of an open world were fading away in the face of nuclear demonstrations and threats at the security of the newly forming camps based around the antagonisms of the interwar period, accentuated by destructive capacities of Industrialism and Nuclear Technology. 2. Communist Resistance Movements against Japanese Occupation Communist Resistance movements would shape the face of geopolitics in Asia and would be significant factors in two major Cold War conflicts: the Korean War and the Invasion of Vietnam. Communist Resistance headed by the Communist Party of China under the leadership of the Maoist faction would confront the Japanese in the Sino-Japanese war. While opposing the Nationalists, the CPC conducted guerrilla warfare against the Japanese and initiated agrarian and tax reform popular with the peasantry thus amassing massive support for the communist movement in China. This would lead to the establishment of the PRC (Mao). Kim Il-Sung and various Marxist groups in Korea would organize a guerrilla movement against the Japanese, in a coordination with the Chinese Communist Party, supported by the Soviet Union. In the course of the Cold War, the popularity of local communist guerrillas will come in direct contest with the influence of the United States and the various organizations that acted as a front for Washington's political, economic and military expansionism in the region such as SEATO. III. Basic Mechanisms of the Cold War Although the Cold War was a global conflict, the heart of the enigma was Europe, more specifically Germany. The geopolitics of the Cold War revolved around the division of Europe by a Curtain, whose source was Berlin. In order to maintain their position, The East and West would form security collectives, the Warsaw Treaty Organization of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization respectively, which would later in the Cold War act as bases of ideological confrontation throughout the world. Along with this trend of separation in Europe, Stalin's Socialism in One Country had come to maturity as the Soviet Industrial capacity had increased. This increase in resources would allow the USSR to support the Decolonization movement that will mark the Cold War era, representing the Ideological battle between East and West. The creation of NATO would also symbolize the demise of the isolationist trend in US foreign policy as the United States would actively partake in its duties as the patriarch of the Western world

Avetis Muradyan A. The Iron Curtain 1. North Atlantic Treaty Organization a. Constituents NATO was signed into existence in 1949 by the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg. It was reaction to the threat imposed on the hegemony of Western Europe by the consolidation of an independent bloc of countries on it's eastern border, hostile to the line of Western Bourgeois Liberalism (NATO - History). b. Policy By 1949, Western European political, economic and military situation had deteriorated to such a degree that the former European rivalries had to be set aside in the face of the ever-menacing Red Army stationed on the Eastern end of the Iron Curtain. The constituent nations of NATO were forced to unite under the Influence of the US with its extensive conventional and nuclear capacities as well as its war-powered economy (NATO - History). The military unification of West would also mark the economic integration of the constituent nations. War-torn nations would be rebuilt by the primordial, US extended, Marshall-Plan and its militaries would be structured to confront those on the other side of the opaque Iron Curtain (CBC). Emerging from WWII as colonial powers, the principal constituents would find themselves in a particularly uncomfortable situation of maintaining Bourgeois Liberalism in Western Europe and maintaining control over their oversees colonies. 2. Warsaw Pact a. Constituents The Warsaw Pact Treaty was signed on May 1955 by Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and the Soviet Union. The WP was formed after the USSR's application to NATO was rejected by unanimously (CBC). Prompted by the expansion of the US zone of influence in Europe and the rejection of the application for membership in NATO, the USSR formally established its own sphere of influence in Eastern Europe. The implementation of the Warsaw Pact signified the effective and final division of the European continent in two ideologically hostile camps. b. Policy The WP acted in a similar fashion to NATO. The Security Collective established a structure in the defense strategy of Eastern Europe and minimized the possibility of Nuclear deployment over the continent by centralizing military operation; a critical action taken in response to the Brinkmanship policy of NATO and the US (Appendix B Germany (East)). The consolidation of the WP created the diplomatic framework necessary for the dtente, championed by the successors of Kennedy, principally Richard Nixon. In the context of Cold War polemics, the Warsaw Pact states backed the Soviet Union's initiative at combating colonialism and supplied resources to the National Liberation movements throughout the emerging Third World. This active role in the overall scenario of the East-West

Avetis Muradyan confrontation would be actively demonstrated in the Suez Canal crisis (Battles that Changed History). Similarly to NATO, the Warsaw Pact Treaty allowed for economic integration of its constituents, culminating the establishment of the COMECON, the Eastern equivalent of the European Economic Community. The object of US policy from the conception of the Cold War to its conclusion was the demise of the Warsaw Pact States and their antagonistic position towards the West, its doctrines and its culture. B. Decolonization A major trend appeared immediately following the conclusion of WWII and the demilitarization of Europe: Decolonization. The disastrous results of the reconquest of Europe on the Western European economic capacity and the establishment of the USSR as the major Anti-Colonial superpower would influence the colonized nations of the world to rebel against their European masters (Sheng). The trend would play a major role in the polemics of the Cold War. The United States would originally support the decolonization movement, but its membership in NATO and the strategic importance of European Empires in counter-acting the influence of the local communist parties and their alignment with the Kremlin, would force the US in a position of pro-colonialism (Eisenhower). The former role of anticolonial power would be demonstrated in the Suez Canal Crisis, leading to the formation of the Eisenhower doctrine. During the entire course of the Suez Crisis, Eisenhower would seek a diplomatic solution; however this course of action would prove ineffective, as the Crisis will permit Soviet Influence to increase in the region and allow the USSR to establish a military presence in the Middle Eastern region (Zoubir). The stipulation of the Eisenhower Doctrine would correct the error and foreign policy and be deployed to full effect during the 1958 Lebanon Crisis, clearly in opposition to decolonization movement. The involvement in French Indochina later known as Vietnam is also a direct result of pro-colonial elements in US foreign policy, seeking to maintain the hegemony of the West over the rest of the revolting world. IV. Methodology of US Foreign Policy A. Korean War and Containment 1. Summary and Influences The outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 is seen as a direct result of the stipulation of the Containment policy by the Truman administration, a policy established to maintain the communist threat to Western and US hegemony, static (Gaddis). The Korean War would also see the use of the UN as an attribute of American foreign policy, although this latter trend would change with the expansion of the organization as a result of decolonization. The source of the Korean War, was the mutual occupation of Korea by US and Soviet forces following the demise of the Japanese Empire in 1945. To maintain the upper hand in the conflict, The Princeton-educated Syngman Rhee was flown in from the United States to Seoul in 1945, to lead the US occupied Korea by establishing the satellite Republic of Korea. Rhee's puppet regime would serve as a base for the Containment of the Kremlin and Beijing sponsored, Kim-il Sung faction, as it presented a direct threat to US hegemony in the region by acting as a center of expansion for Soviet Influence in Asia. After several years of war, the dragging of the PRC into the conflict, the solidification of the conflict at the 38th parallel and hundred thousands of death on both sides, the UN brokered armistice was signed in 1953, and lead to the DMZ. The Korean War was the first proxy conflict of the Cold War.

Avetis Muradyan 2. The UN and Containment Policy The Korean War is notable for the role played by the UN in prior and during the conflagration. The war would be catalyzed at the table of the UN security council (Resolution 83). In Resolution 83, the UNSC will initiate the mobilization of UN forces in defense of the ROK, in the USSR's absence. Much criticism stemmed from the USSR's Foreign Ministry, as declared by Andrei Gromyko (Gromyko): If the Security Council valued the cause of peace, it should have attempted to reconcile the fighting sides in Korea before it adopted such a scandalous resolution. Only the Security Council and the United Nations Secretary-General could have done this. The UN had taken a position in favor of the Western interest as it had utilized US intelligence in the formulation of the resolution and had violated Charter 32 of the UN by refusing North Korea as a temporary sitting member. In a hasty manner, a UN military force was brought against the invading North Korean forces. Truman's Containment policy during the early portion of the Cold War was the basis on which operations in Korea were launched. After a successful revolution in China, The US was in no position to lose any further influence in Asia. By maintaining a presence in the Korean Peninsula, the United States would counter balance Soviet and Chinese influence in Asia. In accordance to the Containment Policy, George F. Kennan, the creator of the policy, declared (Kennan): ... the United States entering with reasonable confidence upon a policy of firm containment, designed to confront the Russians with unalterable counter-force at every point where they show signs of encroaching upon the interests of a peaceful and stable world. Korea was merely an application of the policy described above, which would cost the lives of about 23,600 U.S servicemen according to the DoD (Korean War - Casualty Summary). B. Salvatore Allende and Chile 1973; US policy in Latin America 1. Summary and Influences The 1970 election marked the establishment of a democratically-elected Socialist Government lead by Salvatore Allende. Allende instituted heavy changes in the country such as the nationalization of US corporations in the country's mining sector and Increased funding to Education and Healthcare Programs. His anti-business position would earn him the opposition of the US intelligence state apparatus. This was catalyzed by the improvement of relations with the German Democratic Republic and The People's Republic of China. In 1973, the CIA backed a coup which would remove Allene's democratically-elected government and establish a military dictatorship under Augusto Pinochet (Mabry).

Avetis Muradyan

2. Analysis The rise of Allende marked the rise of leftist ideals in Latin America and stemmed the fears that Chile might become a second Cuba in the hands of US policy markers. It symbolized the challenge at the hegemony of the US in its own sphere of influence. The Nixon administration ,with the Vietnam war on their hands, set upon a path of immediate dissipation of the political subversion exerted by the new Chilean Government. The main tool of this path would be the use of the CIA to conduct covert operations in order to destabilize the country and support financially and technically a military coup in Chile (Memorandum 93). The administration's policies in the hemisphere, consequently those directed at the Chilean republic, were based on Castro trouble-making in the Hemisphere and the Soviet Connection. Arthur Schlesinger clarified the basis of US policy in Latin America (Chomsky): the spread of the Castro idea of taking matters into one's own hands. the distribution of land and other forms of national wealth [in Latin America] greatly favors the propertied classes ... [and] ... The poor and underprivileged, stimulated by the example of the Cuban revolution, are now demanding opportunities for a decent living. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union hovers in the wings, flourishing large development loans and presenting itself as the model for achieving modernization in a single generation." In accordance with the reaction to neo-colonialism in Latin America, US policy maker, set upon a path to overthrow the Chilean socialist government and establish a brutal puppet regime. This will result eventually in the establishment of the bloody Pinochet regime. 3. US policy in Latin America The events in Chile are a representation of US policy though out Latin America, most notably the sponsoring of military dictatorships after the failure of Alliance for Progress. The US openly sponsored towards the establishment of right-wing regimes in the region such as the case in Brazil and resorted to commitment of troops as demonstrated in Operation Powerpack, the military occupation of the Dominican republic (US Department of State). Any attempt to curb the preeminence of the US and its zone of influence would be met with swift aggression. V. Conclusion Through out the Cold War, despite the various stances taken by succeeding administrations, from brinkmanship to dtente, the purpose of US Foreign Policy revolved around the maintenance of the US and the West as the principal military, political and economic force in the World.

Avetis Muradyan

Avetis Muradyan Works Cited "Abraham Lincoln Brigade: Spanish Civil War History and Education: Premature Antifascists and the Post-war World." Abraham Lincoln Brigade: Spanish Civil War History and Education: Abraham Lincoln Brigade Archives. Web. 24 Mar. 2012. <http://www.albavalb.org/resources/lessons/world-war-ii-letters-from-the-abraham-lincoln-brigade/prematureantifascists-and-the-post-war-world/?searchterm=bill susman>. Alperovitz, Gar. "The Decision to Bomb Hiroshima." Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names. 5-7 Aug. 2011. Web. 25 Mar. 2012. <http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/08/05/thedecision-to-bomb-hiroshima/>. "Appendix B -- Germany (East)." Library of Congress / Federal Research Division / Country Studies / Area Handbook Series / Germany (East) / Appendix B. Web. <http://memory.loc.gov/frd/cs/germany_east/gx_appnb.html>. Battles That Changed History: Key Battles That Decided the Fate of Nations. London: Amber, 2010. Print. Beevor, Antony. Berlin: The Downfall, 1945. London: Viking, 2002. Print. Beevor, Antony. The Spanish Civil War. New York: P. Bedrick, 1983. Print. Bishop, Chris, and Chris McNab. Campaigns of World War II: Day by Day. London: Amber, 2003. Print. Carr, Edward H. GermanSoviet Relations between the Two World Wars. Baltimore: John Hopkins, 1979. Print. Chomsky, Noam. "A Century Later, by Noam Chomsky." A Century Later, by Noam Chomsky. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 July 2012. <http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199809--.htm>. Churchill, Winston. "Munich Agreement." Speech. House of Commons, London. 5 Oct. 1938. Churchill Center and Museum. Web. 1 May 2012.

Avetis Muradyan <http://www.winstonchurchill.org/learn/speeches/speeches-of-winston-churchill/101-themunich-agreement>. Department of State. "198." Telegram to US Embassy in Brazil. 31 Mar. 1964. US Department of State, Office of the Historian. Web. <http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus196468v31/d198>. Eisenhower, Dwight D. "Special Message to the Congress on the Situation in the Middle East. Read More at the American Presidency Project: Dwight D. Eisenhower: Special Message to the Congress on the Situation in the Middle East. Http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php? pid=11007&st=&st1=#ixzz1tgZcA9ja." Speech. Congress, Washington. 5 Jan. 1957. The American Presidency Project. Web. <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php? pid=11007&st=&st1=#axzz1tgZHgiKF>. Gaddis, John Lewis. Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy. New York: Oxford UP, 1982. Print. George, Kennan F. "The Sources of Soviet Conduct." Foreign Affairs July 1947. Web. 30 Apr. 2012. <http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Sources_of_Soviet_Conduct>. "History." NATO. Web. 14 Apr. 2012. <http://www.nato.int/history/nato-history.html>. Khaldei, Yevgeny. Raising a Flag over the Reichstag. Photograph. The Floating Library. 12 Oct. 2011. Web. 23 Mar. 2012. <http://thefloatinglibrary.com/2011/10/12/raising-a-flag-over-thereichstag/>. KOREAN WAR - CASUALTY SUMMARY. Rep. Department of Defense, 2008. Print. Mabry, Don. "Chile: Allende's Rise and Fall." Historical Text Archive. Web. <http://www.historicaltextarchive.com/sections.php?action=read&artid=671>. Mao, Tse-tung. On Guerrilla Warfare. Mao Tse-tung Reference Archive. Web. <http://http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/1937/guerrilla-

Avetis Muradyan warfare/ch04.htm>. Memorandum 93 (1970). Print. News, CBC. "Fast Facts about NATO." CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 06 Apr. 2009. Web. 15 Apr. 2012. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2009/04/03/f-nato-fast-facts.html>. Orwell, George. Homage to Catalonia. London: Secker and Warburg, 1938. Print. Orwell, George. "Why I Write - Essay by George Orwell." Charles' George Orwell Links. Web. 24 Mar. 2012. <http://www.netcharles.com/orwell/essays/why-i-write.htm>. Parfitt, Tom. "Moscow Dossier Embarrasses US and Britain Ahead of Riga Summit." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 23 Nov. 2006. Web. 25 Mar. 2012. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/nov/24/russia.politics>. Resolution 83. Rep. no. 83. United Nations Security Council, 1950. Print. Sheng, Michael M. Battling Western Imperialism: Mao, Stalin, and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1997. Print. Stalin, Joseph. "Modern History Sourcebook: Joseph Stalin: Reply to Churchill, 1946." Modern History Sourcebook: Stalin: Reply to Churchill, 1946. Aug. 1997. Web. 14 Apr. 2012. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1946stalin.html>. Thomas, Hugh. The Spanish Civil War. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1961. Print. USSR. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Minister of Foreign Affairs. Soviet News No.2393. By Andrei A. Gromyko. 1950. Fordham University Internet Modern History Sourcebook. Web. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1950-gromyko-korea.html>. Zoubir, Yahia H. The United States, the Soviet Union and Decolonization of the Maghreb, 1945-62. Taylor & Francis, 1995. Print.